Truth of the statement is not a defence against
(A) defamation
(B) breach of privilege
(C) official secret violation
(D) contempt of court
Correct Ans: (D)
Explanation:
Courts treat contempt cases differently from other legal matters. Even if a statement is true, courts may still see it as contempt. This happens when the statement damages the court’s authority or public confidence in it.
Contempt law protects the integrity of the judiciary. Truth alone doesn’t justify speech that insults or weakens a court’s image. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 allows truth as a defence only if it meets two conditions: it must serve the public interest and must be made in good faith.
In contrast:
- (A) Defamation allows truth as a full defence if it benefits the public.
- (B) Breach of privilege involves rules of Parliament or press, where truth may still not help.
- (C) Official secrets law punishes unauthorized disclosures, regardless of truth.
So, truth doesn’t automatically protect someone from contempt charges. The court focuses on intent and effect, not just accuracy. This makes (D) Contempt of Court the correct answer.
